Needless range death

Rockwell1 said:

I feel like an anti for saying this but rampart was unsafe. It had made some improvement the last time I was there but there were still people with no idea of range safety showing up and they weren’t going to listen to anyone asking them to practice range safety. The last time I was there a group (as has been stated before) showed up and just walked down to the line and started blasting one of them swept me finger on the trigger of a cocked semi auto. We left immediately.

I’m sorry but if we, as shooters, can’t police ourselves then yes Rampart needs to be closed

Click to expand...

I'm not going to sit here and call you an "anti", but I do respectfully disagree with this opinion, even if the basis for your argument is valid.

My issue here is that we come down to the same problem that we do with anything that is gun-related. There are plenty of American citizens who feel that all guns should be banned, due to nothing more than the actions of a tiny percentage of people have proven that they are incapable of managing the responsibility that comes with gun ownership. As a result of the actions of a few idiots, we have all been forced into a position where we must constantly defend our rights... and it has been this way for as long as I can remember (I've been shooting about 25 years now).

Similarly, I have to disagree with the argument that "rampart was unsafe". There was nothing inherently wrong with Rampart. The issue here didn't concern the location or design of the range, the proximity to nearby houses, or anything else to do with the facility itself. This recent death happened due to nothing more than one person's reckless actions, just as it could at any other range facility in the country.

Personally, I've shot at expensive ranges, cheap ranges, high-tech ranges, and low-budget operations. I've supervised ranges, shot at unsupervised ranges, and shot at ranges where other people were supervising me. Idiots can show up anywhere, and ignorance can be dangerous/deadly in any setting! I'll concede your point that there tends to be a disproportionate number of idiots hanging out at unsupervised ranges, but I still don't categorically agree with closing these ranges!

Rather than closing these free facilities, I feel that we do need to do a better job of policing ourselves (just as you suggested), and we also need to be ready to involve local law enforcement when "self-correction" fails to solve the problem! I've shot at Rampart on days when everyone who was there was a qualified, capable, and responsible shooter. As I mentioned before, I've also seen the idiots around.

Still, where will we be able to enjoy shooting when all of the public facilities are gone? Many of the private ranges are expensive on a day-to-day basis, and many of the clubs have long waiting lists to join. Even if there were private facilities available, I still like the freedom that comes with being able to enjoy this pastime without having to join a club or pay an admission fee!

I don't believe that you are an "anti", Rockwell, I just simply don't believe that we'll be doing a service to the shooting community by eliminating another facility!


As an afterthought (since I hate to complain without providing my own suggestions), why couldn't the forest service work with local shooters to develop a volunteer range officer program? Volunteer rangers are a large part of the forest service these days, and I see them everywhere from visitor centers to trails. Why not develop a program of volunteers who could take on shifts supervising these ranges, without cost to the taxpayers or shooting community?

I would gladly volunteer my time at a nearby range, as would many of the other shooters I know... Heck, many of us already pitch in more than our fair share when it comes to cleaning and maintaining these facilities! And, as many of us who have shot at private clubs already know, volunteer range officers can often come from your own membership ranks; similarly, they could probably come from the ranks of shooters who use any other given facility, whether it is paid or fee-free!

In my opinion, a program as simple as this could solve 99% of our problems, without costing any of us a dime! With the estimated 40,000 shooters per year who use Rampart, I doubt it would be too hard to fill most shifts with a range officer! Moreover, even if every shift wasn't filled, I think the attitude at these facilities would greatly change when people begin to see that it is effectively supervised most of the time. As I said earlier in this post, we'll never eliminate the idiots... But, we can greatly mitigate the damage that they are able to do to our sport by booting them from range facilities as often as possible (or, perhaps, educating them before needing to boot them).

Rockwell1 said:

Semantics, I meant, “ Rampart was an unsafe place to shoot.” Although it occurs to me that there’s been one death up there since it opened

Click to expand...

Okay, I'll grant you that I'm not looking for an argument based on simple semantics here, so I hope you don't feel like I was trying to tear apart minor details in your last post!

I was merely pointing out that the threat at Rampart comes from the people using the range, and not because of any design flaws in the facility itself... Therefore, the threat at this range is the same as it could be at any other facility that the same public is allowed to access! As I mentioned before, I fully realize that free/unsupervised facilities do tend to attract a higher percentage of the "bad" crowd!

Rockwell1 said:

What will you do when (not if) a carload of bangers shows up that doesn’t give a damn about your idea of range safety?
I agree that a supervised range beats closing it but there’s still some issues to deal with.

Click to expand...

This is an issue that a volunteer could have to deal with in any other capacity where they are expected to provide some guidance to the public, or hold some authority over a facility that is available to all citizens. In Denver's City Park there are unarmed "rangers" who patrol the park, and often come in contact with the local crowd of 'bangers. These rangers immediately contact the PD when things start to go sideways for them... The police then come and handle the incident. Obviously the bad crowd at a shooting range will be armed, but in that case so are the good guys!

A volunteer range officer doesn't need to be expected to forcibly subdue a violent criminal, rather they would be expected to provide guidance and safety instructions to an otherwise law-abiding crowd of shooters. To handle these tasks I'm talking about a system in which the R.O. would be clearly identified at the facility (uniform, or whatever), and rules would be posted that clearly explain that the range officer has authority over the facility while acting in that capacity! This alone would differentiate the person from any other shooter, and hopefully help them to carry a bit more weight when providing instructions (as opposed to just being the 'guy at the next bench').

If things started to get out of hand a range officer could call a cease fire... If the hypothetical 'bangers kept shooting agains the instructions of the R.O., then the R.O. could contact the police, record license plate numbers, and direct the law-abiding shooters on ceasing operations until the situation was resolved. But, in many other situations a range officer could still effectively help to keep the range safe! For example, the only death that ever occured at this range happened when a guy accidentally shot his friend last week (neither alcohol nor gangs appear to have been involved in this incident)!

As an aside, I've found that -on the whole- shooters are mostly law-abiding citizens, and many of them tend to be the types who aren't afraid to rise up against tyranny! I believe that if a range officer was being hassled by a group of bangers, they would likely find that they had some "backup" immediately available to them!

Still, I think that this idea could work, and would work, if properly implimented! If I lived closer to that facility these days, I'd gladly volunteer to take on such a role myself... and I imagine that there are a lot of other responsible shooters who would be similarly inclined!